![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
| Tags: constant, light, speed |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Sue..." wrote in message ups.com... Get a pair of laser pointers and try it. Fair enough. In the case of two separate slide projectors projecting the same image on the screen at the same location, the light source that illuminates each slide is NOT the same. Consequently, interference between the two projected images will not result even though the projected image is the same. (In addition it is difficult to make two identical copies of a slide.) They will be twice as bright because it is random light. Err... Holography. Check your driver's license or credit card. Laser light is not "random". In the case of the multiple telescopes, the same star is used as a light source which means that an interference pattern may result, although not to the same extend as would have occurred if we had used the star in a two slit experiment. This is the case because it is much harder to make two telescopes which are exactly alike than two slits. Click on the VLTI delay line to see just how hard it is. Flying machines are hard too, but I don't discount that such devices might exist just because the problem is difficult. I hope this answers your question since I am still not quite sure what was bothering you about my previous postings. You have the photon clocks of Feynman's path integral but you seem to be lacking the abilty to explore all paths. Asking about the VLTI is just a convenient way to inquire about your theory because a real device leaves no ambiguity. Without ability to explore all paths, your theory predicts that VLTI does not work in interferometer mode... but it does work so you need to go break their telescope. ;o) Hmmm... I'll make a gif of that. Androcles. Sue... Good luck, Len. ................................................ |
| Ads |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
"John Kennaugh" wrote in message .uk... Len Gaasenbeek wrote: THE CONSTANT SPEED OF LIGHT. If we look at the electromagnetic spectrum which shows the frequency of electromagnetic waves (such as x-rays, visible light, micro-waves, television waves, fm waves and long radio waves etc.) versus their wavelength, we notice a direct relationship between the two. If we multiply any given frequency with its corresponding wavelength, we get the speed of light c, providing the electromagnetic wave travels through a vacuum. That is to say, the speed at which all electromagnetic waves travel through a vacuum is constant (c), and is the product of their frequency and wavelength. If we accept the fact that electromagnetic waves consists of photons that follow a helical trajectory, it is easy to understand why this should be so. Because the frequency of a helical photon wave is the number of times each photon completes one helical spiral per second, during which time it travels the same number of wavelengths. Why not a double helix? If a photon consisted of a pair of massless positive and negative charges rotating about a common centre then one might get around to explaining how alternating em fields are somehow involved e.g. Maxwell? You also have the angle between the axis of rotation and the direction of motion to give a concept of polarisation. [snip] -- John Kennaugh to email convert the number from hex to decimal .................................................. ......... To John, All photons are alike and don't carry a charge. This is not to say that multiple colour photon waves can't exist of concentric helical photon waves of different frequencies and amplitudes. Helical photon waves can also become squeezed flat in which case they become polarized in any given plane. The beauty of my proposed helical wave theory is that ALL particles which are accelerated to close to the speed of light turn into helical wave particles, even if they don't carry an electric charge such as a neutron. This is the case because the sideways gyroscopic force, which turns the relativistic particles into helical wave particles, is MECHANICALLY generated. However to accelerate neutrons (as compared to negatively charged electrons or positively charged protons) in a particle accelerator is another matter. The whole of the magnetic spectrum consists of electromagnetic waves. We also know that for example in the case of radio waves, they can be amplitude or frequency modulated and as such can carry information. Exactly what the magnetic field lines of a permanent magnet look like I am not sure, although I am sure that they consist of some kind of standing helical photon waves. However this is another subject, which I did not explore in any detail, when I first developed my theories some 25 years ago. One possibility is that magnetic waves consist of double or triple etc. helical photon waves, but since I never had access to a laboratory, I could not check out the various possibilities and/or alternatives. Enjoy, Len. .................................................. |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Why is the Speed Of Light Constant? | brian a m stuckless | Physics - General Discussion | 0 | March 10th 06 07:30 PM |
| Is the speed of light really constant ? | Bill Hobba | The Theory of Relativity | 69 | October 15th 04 09:47 PM |
| Is the speed of light really constant ? | ande452@attglobal.net | The Theory of Relativity | 1 | September 25th 04 02:24 PM |
| Is the speed of light really constant ? | Ben Bean | The Theory of Relativity | 1 | September 25th 04 12:24 AM |
| Is the speed of light really constant ? | Ben Bean | The Theory of Relativity | 0 | September 24th 04 04:02 PM |